Parliaments in the Pandemic

An international collaboration organized by the
Research Committee of Legislative Specialists (RC08)
of the International Political Science Association
supported by the Institute for Parliamentary Research, Berlin,
and SYRI , Prague.

Table of Contents

Parliaments in the Pandemic (PiP) is an international collaboration organized by the Research Committee of Legislative Specialists (RC 08) of the International Political Science Association. We study how parliaments have dealt with the pandemic situation and how it has affected their roles in the political systems. 43 academic experts worldwide have contributed to PiP and investigated 33 national parliaments in established democracies, systems in transition and authoritarian regimes.

PiP News

  • Nov 16, 2022: Sven T. Siefken will present first findings from the PiP collaboration at the Workshop “Parliaments, Crisis and Foresight” held in conjunction with the 4th Inter Pares Steering Committee Meeting in Dublin, Ireland.
  • Nov. 14-15, 2022 – Third Academic PiP Workshop
  • Nov 6, 2022 – The international workshop on “Parliaments in Crises – Crises in Parliaments” has been rescheduled and will take place in February 2023 in Taipei.
  • Aug. 8, 2022 – In-depth analysis in the international collaboration on “Parliaments in the Pandemic” underway. Based on the expert panel survey (comprising 380 questions), researchers will now analyse how the COVID-19 pandemic has affected parliaments. Nine Working Groups have been installed for the analysis.
  • July 20, 2022 – Second Academic Workshop of the PiP collaboration held online
  • July 15, 2022 – PiP publication (“Parlamente in der Pandemie: Erste Erkenntnisse aus einem international vergleichenden Forschungsvorhaben”) translated to English (“Parliaments in the Pandemic: First Findings from a Comparative Research Collaboration”) and is now available upon request to pip@iparl.de
  • July 11, 2022 – Interview “Doppelter Schock” on Parliaments in the Pandemic with the newspaper “Das Parlament”, published by the German Bundestag
  • June 27, 2022 – Sven T. Siefken presents findings from PiP in the Workshop “Representative Democracy in Times of Crises” at Wroclaw University, sponsored by The Jean Monnet Chair, the Office of the European Parliament & the Regional Representation of the European Commission
  • May 26-27, 2022 – Keynote by Sven T. Siefken in the International Workshop “Parliaments in the Pandemics” at the Institute of Sociology, Czech Academy of Sciences, Prague
  • March 31, 2022 – data gathering closed for wave 2 of the panel expert survey
  • December 15, 2021 – article “Parlamente in der Pandemie: Erste Erkenntnisse aus einem international vergleichenden Forschungsvorhaben“ in Zeitschrift für Parlamentsfragen, the German Journal of Parliamentary Research
  • July 30, 2021 – funding by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research received for a Minerva School „Parliaments after the Pandemic“, to be held in 2023
  • April 22 and April 28, 2021 – first academic PiP Workshop
  • April 16, 2021 – first PiP Working Paper, available upon request
  • February 18, 2021 – data gathering of first wave on Parliaments in the Pandemic closed

Contact

If you are interested in our research collaboration, if you would like to join our network, or you have information to share, please contact us at siefken@iparl.de or PiP@iparl.de

Guiding Questions

The COVID-19 pandemic has been an unparalleled global crisis with far-reaching implications all over the world. But they have varied significantly between political systems. It is our goal to analyse the immediate and broader effects of the pandemic on parliaments through a global collaboration of parliamentary experts in different countries.

The members of the Research Committee of Legislative Specialists (RC08) of the International Political Science Association (IPSA) grappled with these questions as COVID-19 had turned into a worldwide pandemic. During a board meeting held virtually in April 2020, a group of five research coordinators was installed to monitor the developments with regard to parliaments worldwide and to gather information on their global situation.

Following and participating in ongoing public discussions, academic workshops and conferences on the topic, the research coordinators set out to conduct a survey of specialists on parliaments around the world. In the first survey, data from 26 countries and from the EU were collected, covering over 150 questions about parliaments and the reactions to the first wave of the pandemic. The results of the first survey have been analysed and published, and will be subject to further comparative analysis once the data collection for the second survey, covering the subsequent waves of the pandemic, has been finalized.

Research is based on historical institutionalism in order to cater to the particular temporal dimension in the pandemic response. We assume:

  • that the pandemic has hit representative institutions (shifting and sometimes fragile as they are) as an “external shock”;
  • that this shock has consisted in sudden, new environmental challenges for parliaments, as they were posed by the “double shock” of the virus itself and the executive’s prerogative in such a situation;
  • that this external shock interacted with system-internal procedures and patterns of attitudes and behaviour, either by stopping routines and transforming them, or by stimulating the search for new procedures and the acquisition of new behavioural and attitudinal patterns, or both;
  • that either lacking institutional resilience or – so far unnoticed – institutional potential for power-preserving (or power-regaining) reforms have become visible due to the aforementioned factors.

Based on the “process tracing” by country case studies, we want to find out empirically:

  • how exactly this double external shock has hit different parliaments;
  • what those parliaments’ concrete reactions have been to this “double shock”, and what effects in terms of institutional change or shifts in power have resulted from them;
  • what connections can be found between those reactions/consequences and the structural, procedural, attitudinal, and legal characteristics of the political systems under study.

The Five Perspectives of our Research Framework

Our research framework provides the basis for a deeper understanding of how the COVID-19 pandemic has affected parliamentary power in political systems across the globe by investigating five core perspectives:

  • (P1) What were the immediate organizational adjustments of parliament?
  • (P2) How has the fulfillment of parliamentary functions been affected?
  • (P3) What has been the public perception of parliament’s role in responding to the COVID-19 pandemic?
  • (P4) Has parliament done its job correctly?
  • (P5) What shifts of power have emerged between parliament and the executive and within parliament?

(P1) First, we will broadly map the immediate reaction to the crisis in terms of external limitations imposed upon and internal adjustments set up by parliaments themselves. This concerns three dimensions which are intertwined and result from a complex mix of tradition, the broader legal setting, and the evolved parliamentary practices: (i) the predominant ways of parliamentary work, (ii) the architecture and infrastructure, (iii) recent innovations with regard to digitalization.

(P2) We will examine the functions of parliament and their impact on policymaking during the crisis: (i) oversight, (ii) legislation, (iii) communication, (iv) election, and (v) representation. To adequately investigate these functions, parliaments cannot be understood as unified actors. Depending on the type of political system, the role of parties and parliamentary party groups as well as individual MPs will come to the fore, as will the difference between the majority and the opposition – or the particular dynamics in minority governments. Both formal and informal channels of influence have to be considered when investigating the impact of COVID-19 on parliamentary functions.

(P3) Political systems around the globe have taken different steps to handle the pandemic and to protect their citizens. In order to stop the virus from spreading, fundamental liberties have been limited. At the same time, massive economic stimulus packages and relief funds were enacted in a short period of time. Because of the urgency of the crisis response, many of these measures were adopted without much time to carefully consider and debate the shortcomings or possible alternatives. Therefore, special attention will be paid to the public perception of the roles of parliaments in the governmental measures to fight COVID-19. Among others, central questions are: What public knowledge (or lack thereof) existed for the measures? How were they covered in the media? What was the public support (or lack thereof) for the measures? What was the role of parliaments in these policy responses? How does this relate to public acceptance of the measures?

(P4) Based on the findings of organizational adjustments, parliamentary functions, and the public perception of governmental actions, we will be better able to assess the overall performance of parliaments in different political systems. We ask: have parliaments done their job as described in P2?

(P5) This leads us to investigate how the pandemic situation has revealed, accelerated, or been used for shifting power – both within parliaments and outside. Special attention will be paid to (attempted) cases of “power grabs” by the executive branch. Central questions are: (1) What power shifts within parliament and between parliament and the executive government have occurred? (2) How have political actors used the crisis situation to accelerate ongoing transformations?

Working on such findings, we hope to recognize within and across many individual cases patterns of:

  • What ranges of reform ideas (“variation”) have emerged and have been discussed in the compared parliaments in reaction to this “double shock”;
  • Which of these reform ideas have not been followed due to practically insurmountable incompatibility with existing rules and habits (“internal selection”);
  • Which of these reform ideas have been tried out, but have been found not to work (sustainably) in practice (“external selection”);
  • Whether, and under which exact conditions, the pandemic has left a parliament basically in its previous shape and position (after brief disturbances), i.e., without recognizable changes of its long-term path of development;
  • Whether, and under which exact conditions, the pandemic has turned out to be a critical juncture in the development of a parliament, that is: has created a situation in which parliament has, in fact, significantly modified its procedures and structures, or has significantly lost – or gained – power with regard to the executive, and/or authority vis-à-vis the people; and
  • In the case of a “critical juncture”: What forms of institutional change can be observed (“institutional layering”, “institutional conversion”, “institutional drift”, “institutional displacement”), either for parliaments or for (some of) its parts, like committees, party groups etc.; and why have exactly these forms of change been effectuated?

Research Steps

Our research is based on broad and comparative data collection and analysis through a network of country specialists on parliamentary research.

Stage 1: Data Collection First COVID-19 Wave

  • In the first step, we developed a common research framework and defined the information needed to address each of the research questions in the perspectives P1 to P5. Established theories on parliamentary functions, on the separation of powers and on historical institutionalism served as fundamental pillars of the framework. The research framework was finalized in September 2020.
  • We then derived a set of country-specific questions to collect the data.
  • As a pilot study, we set up an online survey for our network partners about parliaments in the pandemic in November 2020. The questionnaire for the expert survey focused both on immediate and broader effects of the pandemic on parliaments, and was closed on February 18, 2021. By that time, we had gathered information about parliaments in 26 countries and the European Union, bringing the total case number to 27.

Stage 2: Data Analysis, First Publications, and Framework Refinement First COVID-19 Wave

  • First analyses were carried out to inform a first Working Paper in mid-April 2021 (see below). The Working Paper served as a basis for an online academic workshop, which was held on April 22 and 28, 2021, with the research coordinators and parliamentary specialists in order to discuss first results and the research framework itself – and to plan the steps for a deeper analysis.
  • Country case analyses and the topical analyses were presented in a range of different international public academic conferences in 2021, e.g. IPSA, DVPW, ECPR, ASPA.
  • An article was published in the German Journal for Parliamentary Affairs (“Zeitschrift für Parlamentsfragen”, ZParl) (see below).

Stage 3: Data Collection Subsequent COVID-19 Waves

  • Based on the first workshop results a second questionnaire covering the subsequent COVID-19 waves, was developed. It included additional questions, and extended both the sample of parliaments as well as the observation period.
  • We finished the data collection and held a second academic workshop in July 2022.

Stage 4: Collaborative Data Analysis

Nine Working Groups have been installed for the collaborative analysis of the PiP data.

  • We will discuss first drafts of in-depth analyses in our network in November 2022 during a third workshop.
  • In 2023, a Minerva School is planned in Berlin, co-organized by Ittai Bar-Siman-Tov and Sven T. Siefken, bringing together research findings from different projects on parliaments and the pandemic.
  • In 2023, an international workshop “Parliaments in Crises – Crises in Parliaments” will be held in Taipei, Taiwan.
  • In 2023 to 2024, we will move toward the publication of results, including an edited volume and special issues of academic journals. We will pursue an in-depth analytical approach in two steps: First, by conducting country case studies, and second, by comparative in-depth topical studies of particular parliamentary functions. Individual researchers will provide single case descriptions of the roles of parliaments in the pandemic by applying the research framework and small groups of researchers will analyse particular functions in detail, for example by analysing the formal and informal ways of decision making across countries or the different communication strategies.

Research Team

Research Coordinators

  • PD Dr. Sven T. Siefken, Institute for Parliamentary Research, Berlin, Colorado College and Martin-Luther-University Halle-Wittenberg, Germany (organizer)
  • Prof. Dr. Osnat Akirav, Western Galilee College, Israel
  • Prof. Dr. Ken Coghill, Swinburne University, Australia
  • Prof. Dr. Petra Guasti, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
  • Prof. em. Dr. Werner Patzelt, Dresden University of Technology, Germany

Research Assistant

  • since 2022: Lorenz Schleyer, Graduate Student of Political Science, Freie Universität Berlin
  • 2020 to 2022: Pauline Haupt, Graduate Student, Sciences Po Paris, School of International Affairs

Parliamentary Specialists

  • Argentina: María Baron, Directorio Legislativo , USA
  • Australia: Prof. Dr. Ken Coghill, Swinburne University, Australia
  • Austria: Dr. Christoph Konrath, Parliament of Austria
  • Brazil: Nilson Rodriges de Assis, Câmara dos Deputados, Brazil
  • Canada: Prof. Dr. Brooke Jeffrey, Concordia University, Canada
  • Croatia, Serbia: Oliver Kannenberg; Institute for Parliamentary Research, Germany
  • Czech Republic: Prof. Dr. Zdenka Mansfeldová, Czech Academy of Sciences,
  • Czech Republic: Prof. Dr. Petra Guasti, Charles University Prague, Czech Republic
  • Czech Republic: David Jagr, Institute of Sociology, Czech Academy of Sciences, Czech Republic
  • Egypt: Prof. Dr. Ali Sawi, Cairo University, Egypt
  • European Union: Prof. Dr. Olivier Costa, College of Europe, Bruges, Belgium
  • European Union: Prof. Dr. Natalie Brack: Université libre de Bruxelles, Belgium
  • Fiji: Dr. Frank Feulner, Senior Governance Advisor and Parliamentary Development Specialist UNDP
  • Finland: Prof. Dr. Tapio Raunio, Tampere University, Finland
  • France: Prof. Dr. Julien Navarro, Lille Catholic University, France; Arthur Delaporte
  • Germany: PD Dr. Sven T. Siefken, Institute for Parliamentary Research, Berlin, Colorado College and Martin-Luther-University Halle-Wittenberg, Germany
  • Germany: Sebastian Hünermund, Martin-Luther-University Halle-Wittenberg, Germany
  • Ghana: Dr. Ernest Darfour, Parliament of Ghana
  • Hungary: Prof. Dr. Csaba Nikolenyi, Concordia University, Montreal, Canada
  • India: Prof. Dr. Bipin Kumar Thakur, University of Delhi, India
  • Indonesia: Dr. Eko Hariadi
  • Israel: Prof. Dr. Osnat Akirav, Western Galilee College, Israel
  • Israel: Dr. Ittai Bar-Siman-Tov, Bar-Ilan University, Israel
  • Italy: Prof. Dr. Federico Russo, University of Salento, Italy
  • Italy: Prof. Dr. Enrico Borghetto, Political Science, University of Florence, Italy
  • Italy: Prof. Dr. Elisabetta De Giorgi, University of Trieste, Italy
  • Italy: Prof. Dr. Francesco Maragoni, Political Science, University of Siena, Italy
  • Italy: Prof. Dr. Luca Verzichelli, Political Science, University of Siena, Italy
  • Japan: Prof. Dr. Mikitaka Masuyama, National Graduate Institute for Policy Studies, Tokyo, Japan
  • Mexico: Prof. Dr. Khemvirg Puente Martinez, National Autonomous University of Mexico, Mexico City, Mexico
  • Nigeria: Dr. Benjamin Ekeyi, political scientist and independent consultant, Nigeria
  • Norway: Prof. Dr. Hilmar Rommetvedt, NORCE Norwegian Research Centre, Norway
  • Palestine: Dr. Nafiz Almadhoun, Palestinian Legislative Council
  • Philippines: Prof. Dr. Ronald Holmes, De La Salle University, Philippines
  • Poland: Prof. Dr. Maciej Serowaniec, Nicolaus Copernicus University in Torun, Poland
  • Portugal: Prof. Dr. Paul Christopher Manuel, American University, Washington, DC, USA
  • Russia, Ukraine: Prof. Dr. Irina Khmelko, University of Tennessee Chattanooga, Tennessee, USA
  • Slovenia: Prof. Drago Zajc, University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Social Sciences
  • South Africa: Dr. Kristen Alicia Heim, Parliamentary Monitoring Group, Cape Town, South Africa
  • South Korea: Prof. Dr. Jeong-In Yun, Korea University, Republic of Korea
  • Spain: Prof. Dr. Pablo Oñate Rubalcaba and Bernabé Aldeguer Cerdá, University of València, Spain
  • Tanzania: Dr. Abel Alfred Kinyondo, University of Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania
  • Turkey: Prof. Dr. Omer Faruk Genckaya, Marmara University, Turkey
  • United Kingdom: Dr. Stephen Holden Bates, University of Birmingham UK; Dr. Alexandra Meakin, University of Manchester, UK
  • United States of America: Prof. Dr. Anne Marie Cammisa, Georgetown University, Washington, DC, USA

Publications and Events

  • Sven T. Siefken, Petra Guasti, Werner J. Patzelt, Osnat Akirav, Ken Coghill, and Pauline Haupt. „Parlamente in der Pandemie: Erste Erkenntnisse aus einem international vergleichenden Forschungsvorhaben.“ ZParl Zeitschrift für Parlamentsfragen, 52(4), 2021, p. 878-94, doi.org/10.5771/0340-1758-2021-4-878. (English version available upon request)
  • Osnat Akirav / Ken Coghill / Petra Guasti / Pauline Haupt / Werner J. Patzelt / Sven T. Siefken: “Parliaments in the Pandemic I”, RCLS PiP Working Paper No. 1/2021, April 16, 2021.